Patterico's Pontifications

4/29/2014

Shaping the Benghazi Story

Filed under: General — Dana @ 8:52 pm

[guest post by Dana]

In an announcement today, Judicial Watch revealed that they received 41 new Benghazi-related State Department documents in response to a FOIA request. One email was particularly revealing.

White House officials consciously planned to spin the successful 2012 jihadi attack on the Benghazi diplomatic compound as a spontaneous protest against an anti-Islam video, according to a new email exposed by the public-interest law firm Judicial Watch.

The Sept. 14 email by Ben Rhodes, President Obama’s chief foreign policy spokesman, described the public relations goals for a planned briefing of a top official — Susan Rice — who was scheduled to appear Sept. 16 on five Sunday talk-shows.

She was invited on the shows to explain the September 11 attack, which killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. The subject of the email was “PREP CALL with Susan.”

The goal of the appearances, said Rhodes, is “to convey that the United States is doing everything that we can to protect our people and facilities abroad; [and] to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, not a broader failure of policy.”

As a reminder, here is what Rice claimed on the Sunday morning shows,

Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo.

In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.

It would appear there is no way to spin any of this. Not only is this problematic for the president, but it is for Hillary Clinton, too, who was secretary of state at the time. The security of the embassy fell to her.

She was implementing Obama’s foreign policy in Libya, following his decision to help kill the country’s leader in 2010. State Department officials have testified that senior officials insisted prior to the attack that there was no need for extra security. The insistence was caused by the White House’s judgement that the Obama-backed Libya government was keeping peace.

Also, if Hillary makes a run in 2016, this should be a serious problem for her.

Untitled-1

–Dana

95 Responses to “Shaping the Benghazi Story”

  1. America is just so…

    oh hell I don’t know

    it’s just in a LOT of trouble is all

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  2. Didn’t President Stompy Foot say yesterday he is tired of people questioning his failed foreign policy?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  3. I don’t know if food stamp is tired of it but for sure Candy Crowley has had it up to here

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  4. Dana – Are you going to blame this on the soulless atheists too?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  5. We thought they were lying all along, and now we know they were. The MFM will ignore this.

    They also were brazenly lying about having released everything.

    JD (6a6c22)

  6. it’s the teenage-girl-on-facebook level of lying what’s so startling

    “tell them it was like totes cause of this like youtube”

    Ladies and gentlemen I give you America’s State Department.

    LOL

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  7. They should stick to #hashtag diplomacy.

    JD (6a6c22)

  8. on top of this

    you have the hilarious spectacle of America getting caught with her whore pants down on…

    September 11!

    Again!

    LOL

    fool me once…

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  9. The story only gets legs into 2016 if the pressure gets high enough so that Team Obama and Team Hillary start trying to throw each other under the bus first. Right now, both sides are sticking together, but if it gets to the point where the White House and State Department are pointing fingers at each other (or the current State Department and the White House are pointing fingers at Hillary), then the media will be forced to acknowledge a story they’re simply going to try pretend isn’t happening over the next 48 hours, in hopes it fades into the background.

    But it will be up to House Republicans to push the issue, and as of late, the main revelations haven’t come from Darrell Issa’s committee or others on Capitol Hill, but from Larry Klayman’s group. That’s not very inspiring when it comes to the odds of House GOP members and their staff moving the Benghazi probe forward on their own.

    John (4ec393)

  10. “They also were brazenly lying about having released everything.”

    JD – Well, they had that impeccably independent and impeccably qualified and impeccably thorough Accountability Review Board.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  11. it’s sad that it takes something as brazenly egregious as this to fail to galvanize the Boehner/McConnell Republicans

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  12. Rotten at the bottom,
    rotten at the top.
    Rotten to the core.
    Rotten, rotting, more and more.

    Who’s to say stop?
    Who’ll simply shill?
    Who’ll risk one’s life?
    Wimp-like, most will
    just avoid the strife.

    What a shame we can’t blame
    the rule-breaker, the czar-maker,
    known by all, by deed and by name.

    Bumpy meter and contrived rhyme,
    restating the obvious,
    about the continuing crime.
    Still, “Je n’regret rien,”
    from another place and time.

    Howard Nelson (017ecd)

  13. Alternate captions for the Pic:

    Damn it, I was this far from getting away with it!

    If those dead guys in Benghazi could duck sniper fire half as good as me they’d be alive today.

    No, I did not declare a War on Bimbos, but I sure as hell dirtied up a few trollops.

    No, I did not shoot Vince Foster, and I don’t recall how the records from his office safe got hidden away in my bedroom closet.

    Of course I’m standing by my man, he’s the President. I may be a doormat, but I’m not stupid.

    ropelight (e3faca)

  14. if I’d the power
    To redact Barry and team
    I’d goddam do it

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  15. Sigh.
    You’re stuck on what happened, when magic user A did not say the incantation magic user B thinks she should have used.

    The only thing that matters is what the Administration and DoS did/did not do before and after the attack. If there’s no scandal there, then Administration spin afterwards doesn’t matter, and if there was scandal there, it matters even less. The only important paragraph in this post was the last one.

    Stick to the main thing, or forget the whole thing.

    kishnevi (a808b4)

  16. Blatant lies… Clinton standing in front of four coffins, telling families of dead heroes AND THE NATION that we’ll get that bastard who made the video, redaction of all salient facts… You might want to rethink post #16.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  17. kishnevi, nice to see you around.

    nk (9faaca)

  18. Where is there anything in here that says that Benjamin Rhodes did not think that what he wanted to get out in public was not the truth??

    The newly released e-mail, sent at about 8:09 pm on Friday, September 14, 2012, indicated he wants to

    “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”

    When did the word “underscore” acquire the secondary meaning of “tell a lie?”

    Now it could still be consistent with the idea that what he wants to get out in public is a lie, but a second e-mail he sent that night, one hour and twenty five minutes later, is not so easy to square with the idea of it being a lie.

    That e-mail, says in part:

    There is a ton of wrong information getting out into the public domain from Congress from people who are not particularly informed. We need to have the capacity to correct the record, as there are significant policy and messaging ramifications that would flow from a hardened misimpression.

    I posted a photo of some of the PDF file this comes from online at http://i42.tinypic.com/2wflqn8.jpg and you can see a not so good picture at
    http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2013/05/politics/white-house-benghazi-email/index.html

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  19. SF, you must get weary carrying so much water.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  20. SOOPER SEKRIT INTELLIGENCE !!!!!

    JD (3273b9)

  21. Now I’ll tell you one problem.

    The White House (and Democrats) are not defending this by saying they accepted disinformation that came from the CIA. That nothing has been done about this is the real scandal.

    It is beinbg claimed today that Michael Mullen gave tetsimony that he didn’t know where the idea that a video was responsible originated from. II think that is a lie and he knows there were a variety of sources SOOPER SEKRIT INTELLIGENCE that indicated that.

    The New York Times has written (last December) that even their reporter heard a video was the cause from the attackers themselves.

    In earlier versions of the talking points the CIA had written about “intelligene partners” and this idea was also coming from people in the L:ibyan government.

    Now, N.B. if in fact this originated outsid ethe CIA and the White House, Mullen would know in fact where it had come from.

    I suppose Mullen can claim he never asked the CIA analysts where they got their ideas from.

    And there’s also an e-mail from David Petraus where he asks if they leave out the message to the Cairo embassy they might as well drop the whole thing. Explanation: He had bene briefed that Cairo had been warned about a demonstration about a video, and that this could have been an indicator that maybe an attack could come at Benghazi.

    The CIA actually never mentioned the word “video” in ther talking points, only demonstration. They were kind of smart.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  22. 20. Comment by askeptic (8ecc78) — 4/30/2014 @ 3:09 pm

    SF, you must get weary carrying so much water.

    I’m trying to stop people from going off on the wrong track. It does get tiring.

    I went into some of this in this thread:

    http://patterico.com/2013/06/10/cbs-news-report-state-department-engaged-in-coverups-of-coverups/

    There was also an e-amil from Tommy Vietor that also indicated the Whote House beleived this to be the truth:

    There is massive disinformation out there, particularly with Congress. They all think it was premeditated based on inaccurate assumptions and breiefings. So I think this is a response to not onky a tasking from the house intel committee but also NSC guidance that we need to brief members/press and correct the record.

    http://i42.tinypic.com/2u8e98x.jpg

    If there was anyone in the White House who knew this to be alie, it was extremely tightly held.

    And consider: Susan Rice’s story fell apart right away! do you think they would have told a lie they knew would fall apart?

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  23. SF, are you confusing the Acting Dir of the CIA, Michael J. Morell, with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Adm. Mullen?

    Morell did testify (at his most recent Congressional appearance IIRC) that he did not believe that the video story was something that “his” analysts would have come up with, or would have advanced.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  24. Relying on SOOPER SEKRIT INTELLIGENCE, and then not doing anythinbg the fact that the CIA had touted as true something that is completely false is the true scandal. Nobody wants to hear that.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  25. That it was tightly held is a given, in that this email was not provided to the Congress when it was originally asked for, and was heavily redacted when they finally got it. Only Judicial Watch, in response to a FOIA lawsuit, has been provided with the original email, which is why we are talking about Ben Rhodes today.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  26. 24. Comment by askeptic (8ecc78) — 4/30/2014 @ 3:16 pm

    SF, are you confusing the Acting Dir of the CIA, Michael J. Morell, with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Adm. Mullen?

    I might. I didn’t have that thing I read in front of me when I read it.

    P.S. I checked.

    National Review’s Morning Jolt says today that former CIA Director Mike Morrell testified earlier this month that he had no idea where the story about avideo protest came from when when he sww Rice make the claim on television.

    Here it is in a USA TODAY story:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/04/29/benghazi-emails-point-at-white-house/8471737/

    Though there was some dispute over the manner of the attack, former CIA deputy director Mike Morell testified earlier this month that he had no idea where the story about a video protest came from when he saw Rice make the claim on television.

    We need to see what his actual tetsimony was.

    Morell did testify (at his most recent Congressional appearance IIRC) that he did not believe that the video story was something that “his” analysts would have come up with, or would have advanced.

    That would make sense. It didn’t come from the Pentagon, and it didn’t come from the Satgte Department.

    It came from the CIA and it wasn’t made up oout of whole cloth in the White House.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  27. 26 Comment by askeptic (8ecc78) — 4/30/2014 @ 3:19 pm

    That it was tightly held is a given,

    I meant that if the whote House knew this story was a lie, and/or had made it up, that fact was very tightly held.

    in that this email was not provided to the Congress when it was originally asked for, and was heavily redacted when they finally got it.

    But this actually doesn’t tell us too much knew. We knew already, last May, that the NSC was anxious to get this out.

    Only Judicial Watch, in response to a FOIA lawsuit, has been provided with the original email, which is why we are talking about Ben Rhodes today.

    They are helping to flesh out the picture a bit, but it is not really news.

    We already had the “talking points” e-mails, which apparently nobody really studied.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  28. It came from the CIA and it wasn’t made up oout of whole cloth in the White House.

    SF, you’ve got that exactly backwards.
    Morell specifically said that the video line did not come from the CIA, and the email from Rhodes seems to suggest, and most people seem to believe, that this was made up out of whole cloth at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  29. Benjamin Rhodes wanted to get the “news” out to the entire world that the attack in Benghazi was “spontaneous” and could not have been predicted because it happened only as a result of the video, and that had become well known only that day.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  30. He might have wanted to do that, but his “news” was in conflict with all the known evidence of the event supplied by people “on the ground”.
    It was a political lie, advanced to cover up a policy lie (Detroit is alive, and Al-Queda is dead), and to calm the storm before the election.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  31. “It came from the CIA and it wasn’t made up oout of whole cloth in the White House.”

    Sammy – Hicks in Tripoli said no protest. CIA Station Chief said no protest.

    State Department and White House both loved protest angle because it absolved them of blame and they jumped on top of that pony.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  32. Comment by askeptic (8ecc78) — 4/30/2014 @ 3:46 pm

    Morell specifically said that the video line did not come from the CIA,

    I think that’s a lie. But I noticed taht in their written drafts of the “talking points” the word video was never mentioned, but only “protests at the U.s. Embassy at Caito.”

    And that the attacks (later changed to protests) in Benghazi were “spontaneously inspired” by them.

    Of course everybody by the end of that week thought the protests were about the video.

    The Cairo Embassy had thought that was what the protests were going to be about and tweeted taht the U.S. was nt responsibe for it.

    Do you imagine, for one second, that was aimed at
    a U.S. audience?

    Those tweets went out before anythinbg had happened in Benghazi.

    and the email from Rhodes seems to suggest, and most people seem to believe, that this was made up out of whole cloth at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

    He was sending these emails (not the one released now, but the ones released last year) to people in the State Department, people in the CIA. If this was all news to them, wouldn’t they have been surprised?

    The CIA said that the attacks were spontaneous and inspired by what happened in Cairo. Not the White House.

    The reason the CIA said that, was in order that they should not be tasked to look for who was behind it. They did not expect the White House would run with this information and explode the claim.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  33. Usually with an Arab street protest denouncing America we see pictures and videos. With the alleged Benghazi protests against the video I have seen nothing, although it is certainly possible I may have missed something.

    Curious.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  34. Oh, for the sake of f@ck, Sammah.

    JD (3273b9)

  35. “Of course everybody by the end of that week thought the protests were about the video.”

    Completely wrong. I don’t understand why you keep repeating this nonsense.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  36. Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/30/2014 @ 3:56 pm

    Sammy – Hicks in Tripoli said no protest. CIA Station Chief said no protest.

    Correct. And Morell has said he trusted the analysts more than them. I can’t quiote find that now, but I found this:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/sources-on-ground-during-benghazi-attack-slam-ex-cia-boss-morells-testimony/

    As part of Morell’s testimony on Wednesday, the former acting and deputy CIA director acknowledged that he overruled the guidance of the top CIA officer in Libya at the time. That official told Morell the attack was not an “escalation of protests,” but Morell said he had to weigh that against analysts who concluded the opposite. He ultimately went with the analysts — whose assessment later turned out to be flawed — saying the chief of station’s report was not “compelling” and was based on loose evidence.

    …Another said Morell either still has no idea what happened that night, or he is covering for someone. “Human intelligence takes precedence over everything else and he had no better intelligence than multiple reports from credible sources coming from the ground that night,” one operator said.

    Here we have a CIA source specifically saying that they relied on SOOPER SEKRIT INTELLIGENCE:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/31/cia-ignored-station-chief-in-libya-when-creating-t/?page=all

    A third source told The Times on Monday that Mr. Morell and other CIA officials in Washington were weighing several pieces of “conflicting information” streaming in about the Benghazi attack as the talking points were being crafted.

    “That’s why they ultimately came up with the analysis that they did,” the source said. “The piece that was coming out of Tripoli was important, but it was one piece amid several streams of information.”

    One of the former intelligence officials said the Libya station chief’s assessment was being weighed against media reports from the ground in Benghazi that quoted witnesses as saying there had been a protest. Analysts at the CIA, the source said, also were weighing it against reporting by other intelligence divisions, including the National Security Agency.

    “The chief of station in Tripoli who was 600 or 700 miles away from the attacks wouldn’t necessarily have the only view of what actually went on in Benghazi,” that former official said.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  37. SF, I just watched a reviewing of Morell’s testimony (4/2) on Fox News Special Report today where he made the statement that the video was not something his analysts would have believed in. He had earlier said that he did not insert the video meme into the talking points.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  38. “If this was all news to them, wouldn’t they have been surprised?”

    Sammy – I don’t know. How did they react?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  39. it shows to go you
    you can fool teh Finkelman
    ALL the effin time

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  40. State Department and White House both loved protest angle because it absolved them of blame and they jumped on top of that pony.

    No, what the White House loved was the “spontaneous” = “couldn’t have been predicted” angle.

    The State Department = Hillary Clinton – didn’t argue the point.

    It only protsted numerous claims of general danger in Benghazi that the CIA said it had told teh state Department and inserted into the talking points. (all taken out by Morell at the end)

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  41. Sammy – Barack and Hillary were selling the video story hard on 9/12. How did they conclude that was the right story to peddle?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  42. Sammy noodles with
    PT Barnum Charlie Chan
    he got U.S. Blues

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  43. Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/30/2014 @ 4:06 pm

    How did they react?

    The people in the State Department were mainly puzzled about what the purpose of the exercise was. Victoria Nuland wanted to know: Was this unclassified or classified testimony? She was told this was talking points for the committee.

    Jacob J. Sullivan said some of the statements below are new to me. Tommy Vietor said there was massive disinformation out there.

    I think they probably took guidance from Hillary Clinton.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  44. 42. Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/30/2014 @ 4:09 pm

    Sammy – Barack and Hillary were selling the video story hard on 9/12. How did they conclude that was the right story to peddle?

    Because the CIA had told them that!! But that was only about what the Cairo protest was about.

    Also, when the story started to take off, demonstrations against the video were organzied in many countries.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  45. 38. Comment by askeptic (8ecc78) — 4/30/2014 @ 4:05 pm

    SF, I just watched a reviewing of Morell’s testimony (4/2) on Fox News Special Report today where he made the statement that the video was not something his analysts would have believed in. He had earlier said that he did not insert the video meme into the talking points.

    Nobody did. It’s not in there.

    But that doesn’t mean it was being told to other people in the government orally.

    I noticed some time ago that there is not any mention of the video in anything written by the CIA. I thought that was very devious of them.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  46. Here are the “talking points”

    http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/Benghazi%20Talking%20Points%20Timeline.pdf

    Notice that the word “video” does not appear in it <b. even one time!

    In any version.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  47. Plausible deniability.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  48. Sammy,

    It sounds like you’re the one shaping the shape of the Benghazi story. Or something.

    Hillary ’16 !

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  49. fat Candy Crowley
    Satan has special Hot Seat
    for your big fat ass

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  50. 48… actionable intelligence

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  51. At some point, Sammy, truth and the lives of our countrymen must take precedence over political expediency… no?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  52. See Jay Carnie lie. Run, Jay Carnie, run. While you have a shred of a future.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  53. Sammy, do you have an interest at all in learning what happened on that 9/11 in Benghazi? Do you want to know who the direct actors and decision makers were, and who the subsequent players are who’ve tried to cover up the truth? Do you care to examine the extent of illegality and immorality that some affiliated with this administration have apparently gone to to do that? Or do you just plan to continue to put your fingers in you ears and sing “la la la” because your worldview about this issue is collapsing?

    elissa (712a2c)

  54. Here’s where I stand, and it seems where more than a few media people are now standing (particularly when you watch the confrontation between Carney and ABC today):
    This was a terrorist attack, planned in advance – otherwise they got very lucky in their placement of the mortar tubes which remarkably were spot-on to their targets;
    That there are no contemporary reports of a street demonstration in Benghazi would seem to confirm that the “incident” was not spontaneous;
    All contemporaneous accounts report an attack;
    The CIA analysts report an attack;
    The State Dept. and White House waffle on any use of the phrase “terrorist activity” in relation to Benghazi;
    Talking points get passed back and forth but the paternity of the video meme is a great mystery though the CIA and FBI deny that it came from them;
    Finally, nine-months (or more) after a subpoena for ALL Benghazi-related communications, the Congress finally sees an unredacted memo from Ben Rhodes to all the other players in the five-talking heads-media shows circus that lo-and-behold mentions the video, a video that was only briefly and in highly edited form seen on alJazeera on-line and hardly remarked upon in the ME – and not at all in Libya;
    The video maker is then rounded up in the middle of the night on an alleged fraud probation violation;
    The SecState condemns the video while standing in front of the caskets of the fallen from Benghazi, repeating the lie of the video meme.

    We still need to discover who it was in the chain-of-command between Ben Rhodes and the President that originated the video meme, and how did Hillary get the message just prior to the time-stamp on this memo that she mentioned in an interview?
    Did it come from the Oval Office, or from a senior adviser with access to that office?

    The American People have been lied to, and that type of offense was cited by the House Committee on the Judiciary in its Impeachment write-up in the Watergate matter as one of the points of offense by the President, and it is no less a valid accusation today against this President in this matter.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  55. Sammy still believes that the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS was just “coincidental.”
    Or something.

    That’s why Lois Lerner refuses to testify.
    Because she doesn’t want to incriminate herself tell the world about coincidences !!!!1!!1!
    Or whatever.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  56. The screw-up might have been forgiven but for the cover-up.

    Obama: Out Nixoning Nixon and out Cartering Carter since 2008!

    And Hillary gets credit too, since the buck first passes through her on its way to the Oval Office desk.

    Dan S (00fc90)

  57. alphabet networks
    You just cannot suck enough
    Still covering up

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  58. AP?
    They’ve comfortably been in the Progressive pocket for a decade or more.
    If an AP story came over the wire talking about the sunrise, I’d step outside to make sure it was still in the East.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  59. Barack Obama
    I have more than a smidgen
    of contempt for y’all

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  60. They’re covering up
    original cover up
    now in Twilight Zone

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  61. Dear America,

    It’s not me, it’s you.

    Love,
    Signed,

    Barack

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  62. true, water is damp, but it’s rare when you see them collaborating, ala Journolist

    narciso (3fec35)

  63. I want to see the email or printout/handout between the white house political news shapers and Candy Crowley before the infamous debate.

    elissa (712a2c)

  64. Speaking of shapes, what shape is Candy Crowley ?

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  65. Dear Barack,

    Since your administration claims that “winter” caused a slowdown in our economy, shouldn’t we reduce the emissions regulations on industry in order to help “warm” the planet, thereby improving the economy ?

    Screw You,
    Signed,

    America

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  66. Like an egg

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  67. “I noticed some time ago that there is not any mention of the video in anything written by the CIA. I thought that was very devious of them.”

    Sammy – The CIA used their mind control rays to disseminate the theory.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  68. How did they get the mind-ray machine away from Karl Rove?

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  69. No he has the weather machine.

    narciso (3fec35)

  70. “I noticed some time ago that there is not any mention of the video in anything written by the CIA. I thought that was very devious of them.”

    Sammy – The CIA used their mind control rays to disseminate the theory.

    No, they were just careful not to put anything on the record. Just orally.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  71. ==No, they were just careful not to put anything on the record. Just orally.==

    Who is “they” Sammy? Who called the shots and issued the audibles, Sammy? Name names.

    elissa (712a2c)

  72. While it is absent from the talking points, Susan Rice did mention a video in her appearances on five Sunday morning network interview shows on September 16, 2012.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-transcripts-september-16-2012-libyan-pres-magariaf-amb-rice-and-sen-mccain/

    Here, Bob Schieffer says:

    BOB SCHIEFFER: Today on FACE THE NATION on the anniversary of 9/11, an attack in Libya takes the life of our ambassador there and three other Americans. And a new attack in Afghanistan today leaves four U.S. service members dead.

    As the anti-American protests over a U.S.-made anti-Muslim film spread across the Arab world from Africa to Afghanistan to Australia…

    But does Susan Rice mention a “film” or a “video?”

    ….But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy–

    Will she mention the video?

    Click and wait for the page to load:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-transcripts-september-16-2012-libyan-pres-magariaf-amb-rice-and-sen-mccain/2/

    Yes!

    BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.

    SUSAN RICE: – sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that– in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.

    Mind control rays? No. But very clever at getting the idea across while leaving no fingerprints.

    BOB SCHIEFFER: But you do not agree with him that this was something that had been plotted out several months ago?

    SUSAN RICE: We do not– we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.

    BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you agree or disagree with him that al Qaeda had some part in this?

    SUSAN RICE: Well, we’ll have to find out that out. I mean I think it’s clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we’ll have to determine.

    While the video is not in the talking points, the idea this was not pre-planned is.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  73. New Benghazi post is up.

    Dana (9f8700)

  74. ==No, they were just careful not to put anything on the record. Just orally.==

    Comment by elissa (712a2c) — 4/30/2014 @ 6:31 pm

    Who is “they” Sammy? Who called the shots and issued the audibles, Sammy? Name names.

    The people at the CIA. I don’t know who. I don’t think their names are public.

    These would be the same people, by and large, who conspired to remove the CIA director. I think this is best explained by their being foreign intelligence moles.

    Susan Rice, who did not know it was an untrue story, did mention the video.

    I think the people who knew it had nothing to do with the attack were very careful not to have anything traceable to them that said a video or a film had sparked the demonstrations.

    Susan Rice, however, did not know she should stay away from that claim.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  75. There. is. no. hope.

    elissa (712a2c)

  76. Here are links to Susan Rice’s other four appearances that Sunday:

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49051097/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts/t/september-benjamin-netanyahu-susan-rice-keith-ellison-peter-king-bob-woodward-jeffrey-goldberg-andrea-mitchell/

    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday-chris-wallace/2012/09/16/amb-susan-rice-rep-mike-rogers-discuss-violence-against-americans-middle-east#p//v/1843960658001

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-us-ambassador-united-nations-susan-rice/story?id=17240933

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1209/16/sotu.01.html

    On Meet the Press:

    But putting together the best information that we have available to us today our current assessment is that what happened in Benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo, almost a copycat of– of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video. What we think then transpired in Benghazi is that opportunistic extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. They came with heavy weapons which unfortunately are readily available in post revolutionary Libya. And it escalated into a much more violent episode. Obviously, that’s– that’s our best judgment now. We’ll await the results of the investigation. And the president has been very clear–we’ll work with the Libyan authorities to bring those responsible to justice.

    On Fox News Sunday:

    But what sparked the recent violence was the airing on the Internet of a very hateful very offensive video that has offended many people around the world.

    Now, our strong view is that there is no excuse for violence. It is absolutely reprehensible and never justified. But, in fact, there have been those in various parts of the world who have reacted with violence. Their governments have increasingly and effectively responded and protected our facilities and condemned the violence and this outrageous response to what is an offensive video. But there is no question that what we have seen in the past, with things like satanic verses, with the cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad, there have been — such things that have sparked outrage and anger and this has been the proximate cause of what we’ve seen.

    On ABC’s “This Week:

    [says there is an FBI investigation] But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.

    We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to — or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in — in the wake of the revolution in Libya are — are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there.

    On CNN’s “State of the Union:

    RICE: Well, Candy, first of all, let’s recall what has happened in the last several days. There was a hateful video that was disseminated on the internet. It had nothing to do with the United States government and it’s one that we find disgusting and reprehensible. It’s been offensive to many, many people around the world.

    That sparked violence in various parts of the world, including violence directed against western facilities including our embassies and consulates. That violence is absolutely unacceptable, it’s not a response that one can ever condone when it comes to such a video. And we have been working very closely and, indeed, effectively with the governments in the region and around the world to secure our personnel, secure our embassy, condemn the violent response to this video.

    And, frankly, we’ve seen these sorts of incidents in the past. We’ve seen violent responses to “Satanic Verses.” We’ve seen violent responses to the cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed in an evil way. So this is something we’ve seen in the past, and we expect that it’s possible that these kinds of things could percolate into the future. What we’re focused on is securing our personnel, securing our facilities.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  77. Good allah, Sammy,

    Susan Rice’s obvious lying on the Sunday shows was, well obvious. We have been talking about why she was “the one” chosen to lie ever since that Sunday, and dozens of subsequent times on this blog. It was her uncomfortable canned speech on the full Ginsburg that Sunday that tipped everybody off that a cover-up was afoot. Where have you been?

    elissa (712a2c)

  78. 57. Comment by Walter Cronanty (d16f1a) — 4/30/2014 @ 5:06 pm

    Sammy, the Cairo riots were about the Blind Sheik, not that stupid video that nobody saw.

    The actual demonstration, but that’s not what the State Department thought. That’s not something they made up later. The Cairo Embassy indicated that in their tweets.

    Now, I think, the CIA had sent a message to Cairo warning there would be aprotest there about the video.

    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ex-diplomat-asked-answer-benghazi-questions

    “No mention of the cable to Cairo, either?” Petraeus wrote after receiving Morell’s edited version, developed after an intense back-and-forth among Obama administration officials. “Frankly, I’d just as soon not use this, then.”

    Nobody asks: “What cable to Cairo???

    Filling in the blanks, this was obviously, some cable that prompted the Cairo embassy to issue those tweets.

    (When Davod Petraeus wrote that, there were numerous citations in the taking points, later deleted, of “warnings” the CIA had given the State Department of possible attacks but not the cable to Cairo! (the cable, that is, that I have deduced was sent.)

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  79. Comment by elissa (712a2c) — 4/30/2014 @ 7:01 pm

    Susan Rice’s obvious lying on the Sunday shows was, well obvious. We have been talking about why she was “the one” chosen to lie ever since that Sunday, and dozens of subsequent times on this blog.

    Because, neither she, nor anyone else in the White House, knew it was a lie. They just thought this was very good news for them.

    But the thing is, at that stage, everyone in the media knew this had not been spontaneous and unplanned, and going public with it, destroyed the belief in the White House of this story.

    That was not what the CIA had intended.

    When the CIA (or the handlers of the moles) came up with that story, they just wanted to stall or prevent an investigation into who was behind it, and who had planned it.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  80. Oh. Sam now says he’s been deducing and “filling in the blanks”. Thankfully I have an electric oven.

    elissa (712a2c)

  81. The CIA-written “talking points” have the idea that the attack/demonstration in Benghazi was spontaneous and inspired by the earlier protest in Cairo, but it does not say that the earlier attack in cairo was about a video.

    They said that somewhere else, in a still secret cable, and orally.

    Some people, though, were being very careful not to repeat the video story.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  82. 83. Comment by elissa (712a2c) — 4/30/2014 @ 7:13 pm

    Oh. Sam now says he’s been deducing and “filling in the blanks”. Thankfully I have an electric oven.

    You can only do so much, but some you can do, and that the CIA sent a cable to the Cairo embassy on or shortly before September 11, 2012, warning there would be a demonstration about a video, is a fairly safe assumption.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  83. They didn’t send out those tweets that Mtt Romney and others complained about to fool the American public about an attack in Benghazi that had not yet occurred at the time the tweets were sent.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  84. You know what they say about assuming, Sammy.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  85. I’d believe Romney before I’d believe anything from these liars, Sammy. They wouldn’t know the truth if it bit them on their narrow asses.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  86. They must have gotten that idea from somewhere – most like the cable that David Petraeus mentions.

    And the fact that he mentions it in an email about Benghazi indicates that it had been linked to the Benghazi attacks – that is, this was, the closest warning that the CIA had issued about a
    Benghazi attack.

    The CIA “warnings” had been deleted by that point, and Petraeus is disappointed that not even the best warning – the one in the cable to the Cairo Embassy, presumably about the “fact” that a demonstration was going to take place due to the video – was in there.

    I think he may not have realized it was never in there.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  87. 88. Comment by Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 4/30/2014 @ 7:22 pm

    I’d believe Romney before I’d believe anything from these liars, Sammy. They wouldn’t know the truth if it bit them on their narrow asses

    There’s nothing wrong with what Romney said.

    The Cairo Embassy had sent these tweets disclaiming any connection with the video. They re-endorsed it after the attack in Cairo.

    And then for hours said nothing else. so this was standing as the reaction.

    Romney wanted to issue a statement – however he had made a decision not to make any campaign statements on September 11.

    Finally, he prepared a statement, embargoed for midnight, but released around 10 pm to the press. Hearing of this, Hillary Clinton issued some sattement, and I think also disavowed what the Caiiro embassy had tweeted and said. This was around 10:30 pm, and became public before Mitt Romney’s statement.

    At that point the attack in Benghazi had started, (the consultate notified Tripoli it was under attack at 9:40 Libyan time, 3:40 eastern time) but nobody outside the government knew about it. They only knew about the attack in Cairo.

    It was only the next day, September 12th that an announcement was made, and it was not a complete announcement at first.

    First, the State Department anounced that one American was dead, and only later that four Americans were dead and one was the Ambassador to Libya.

    Sammy Finkelman (0f2215)

  88. Sammy – You are a complete mess on Benghazi. You have no coherent time line, no coherent cast of characters, no coherent narrative, no coherent documentation.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  89. Comment by elissa (712a2c) — 4/30/2014 @ 7:01 pm

    Where?
    On a world in a Galaxy far, far away.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  90. daley, are you trying to say that Sammy is just not coherent?
    Quit trying to make your point the hard way.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  91. 93. I’ve come to accept that some questions, like ‘Why?’ are not submissive to answers, or at least answers that resolve my feeling of confusion.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4516 secs.